The more keen eyed may have noted that there are three new links on the page: Grace Presbyterian, a list of Reformed Churches, and Matt Walsh. The issue of Grace Presbyterian is interesting, for it is a recent — within a decade — splint from the NZ Presbyterian Church (PCANZ from hereon). PCANZ has a liberal branch. Very liberal. And they were challenging the refusal of more conservative branches to accept woman ministers. This is not the first time this has happened.
In the late 1940s migrants from the Netherlands settling in New Zealand expected to find their spiritual homes in existing churches of Reformed persuasion, particularly the Presbyterian Church of New Zealand. Instead they found departures from Reformed doctrine and practice that they could not overlook. A study committee traced the problem to the Declaratory Act of 1901, which made a distinction between the traditional understanding of the Bible as being the word of God and newer view which sees the word of God being contained in Scripture. It was this act which, the committee believed, allowed the Church to accept as office bearers, those who did not believe in a literal virgin birth of Christ (for example) when they subscribed to the Westminster Confession.
As a result, the Reformed Churches of New Zealand were officially established in 1953 at a meeting (synod) in Wellington where churches from Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch were represented. One congregation in Bucklands Beach in Auckland left the denomination en masse and joined the new Church. Over the years further congregations have been established, and the denomination now comprises about twenty congregations.[5]
One group under George Mackenzie left in the 1960s and formed the Orthodox Presbyterian Church of New Zealand.
Often confused as a breakaway church is Grace Presbyterian Church of New Zealand, which was actually a group of pre-existing independent churches that united into a new denomination. There is sometimes confusion because the church contains a significant number of former members of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand who have sought a more theologically conservative alternative.
Now, Christ taught us that we should be one: indeed that is the text for today. That no one should separate from the Catholic Faith, which they see embedded within the Roman Church. I have seen this used as a proof text: and at present I am torn — for theologically I am conservative in a conservative congregation in a church where the committees are run by liberals.
20“I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, 21that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, 23I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. 24Father, I desire that those also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory, which you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world.
25“Righteous Father, the world does not know you, but I know you; and these know that you have sent me. 26I made your name known to them, and I will make it known, so that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.”
I have believed for years that there is a functional unity which is not denominational. Instead it is those who have the spirit of God in them and those who are Churchians. Churchians are political creatures. They are very much thinking about what people think of them. The Churchians infest everywhere — as much in the Catholic church, or the Orthodox, as among the fractal protestants. Moreover, there are divisions between us by simple geography and language. Regardless of this, the church is universal, and I believe in the Holy Catholic Church — for the word Catholic equates to universal.
But the division shows. Consider this among the Presbyterians: the twits on the committee forget who spoke most in the Bible about hell and damnation: our Lord, Jesus of Nazareth.
The Presbyterian Committee on Congregational Songs for the Presbyterian Church (USA) has decided to not include the hymn “In Christ Alone” because one phrase speaks about God’s wrath.
Carmen Fowler LaBerge, president of the Presbyterian Lay Committee, told The Christian Post on Friday that the Congregational Songs Committee’s decision is evidence of why churches are leaving the PC (USA).
“For the denomination to decide, intentionally, to remove ‘In Christ Alone’ from the hymnal, in my view, bares evidence of serious erosion of the denomination’s theology related to the atonement,” LaBerge asserted.
“God chooses to reveal about Himself what He chooses to reveal. And what God has chosen to reveal about His nature and character in the scriptures includes His anger toward the reality of sin; and the manifestation of that through what scripture describes as His wrath,” LaBerge continued. “The wrath of God is God’s own holy righteous response to the reality of human sin. God solved that problem, graciously, through the act of Christ upon the cross.”
And I agree with Mundabor. I miss Ratzinger. The effect he had on liberals was a joy (and that is not necessarily a good thing). But this very staunch Catholic Brother can be as scathing of the Pope — in fact more scathing than those who are not of the Roman confession, for he knows his faith and his doctrine.
The wrecking ball humbly devastating Catholicism is, predictably, also showing its destructive effect on the sacraments. Five percent say they now go to confession more often, twenty two percent less. Is it surprising? With a Pope treating all sacraments like something that does nothing else than improving your day – remember: he cannot imagine God doing more than slapping one on the wrist; salvation is open even to atheists; Muslims should cling to their own religion; Jews have their own reserved lane to Jesus – how can one be surprised that the sacraments are neglected?I suspect the five percent going to confession more often do it rather as a reaction to Francis than because they like him. Those who like him have no reason to do anything than feel pleased with themselves: no judging anymore, no fear of the Lord. Converting others no Catholicism? No, no, no!
Sit back and relax: the Humble Pope will tell you everything you need to hear.
One year later, the damage made by the Age of Stupidity cannot be ignored. The demolition is not even subtle. It’s brutally explicit, vulgar, unashamed of its own irreligiousness, shouted from the rooftops.
Please, Lord, free us from this scourge.
The trouble is that we will not be freed from this scourge. It will always be with us, and within even the most careful and theologically disciplined churches people will spread error. We have to trust that God will correct the errors.
What am I doing? Well, during term time there is a congregation that preaches the gospel. It is Presbyterian. It meets close to where I live in a hired hall.
And when school is not in I go to the Grace Presbyterian. If pushed to choose, I would probably go to Grace. But… the unity of the people of faith is not between congregations, nor organic, but driven by the spirit of God. There is not a single perfect church without churchians. And the Churchians, themselves need the gospel.
You’re welcome.
(For pointing you towards it.)
Yeah, I knew of them. And having worshipped with them over the summer, they are truly reformed and truly orthodox. Moreover, they are not stupid: they know that they are not a pure group — that is the anabaptist heresy.
It is about relationships. If the group in the PCANZ go liberal in theology (I live in a university town, left wing and green politics is conventional here) then I’m gone, But until then I will try to preserve unity.
Francis is concerning. I do think he means well, but he seems to deliberately phrase things in a way intended to be an olive branch to the disaffected precisely by blurring what he means. The latest is his bit about civil unions, which gays everywhere on the planet are latching onto as the Church moving in the direction of at least being indifferent to civil gay unions, and accepting these people as regular churchgoers and at the chalice and so on. I don’t think that’s what he intends, but I think what he does intend is to make it vague and blurry enough that he can attract the disaffected back to the church. It’s a gamble. These folks, if they do come back, are going to want their bennies. If they end up being empty-handed, they won’t be much happier with the church than they are now.
Even this reformed guy (remember, we are the ones who said that the Pope was the antichrist during the reformation) is praying for the RCC. Because they are the point of the spear right now.
“[..]With a Pope treating all sacraments like something that does nothing else than improving your day…”
The problem with Mundabor’s[?] criticism of Pope Francis, is that sacraments were never believed to render Catholics infallible. Catholics like to think they do – but that is just wishful thinking akin to the Baptist addendum “once saved, always saved”. Comforting, but scriptural-ly inaccurate.
My issue with overly-powerful sacraments is that it leads to ignoring of scripture, and (as bizarre as this may seem) the divorce of Christ from Communion. Confession and Communion are what lead to heaven – not Christ. (I know that’s not official Catholic doctrine; but here in America, Catholic Churches like to support that myth – it appeals to the overwhelmingly progressive Catholic majority).
From an Ex-Catholic perspective, I admire Pope Francis for his willingness to tackle widespread false doctrine. However; I can see why critics accuse him of being Protestant. Using scripture to define religious practices is rather a Protestant argument.